W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > August 2010

Re: Implementation of Inset Box Shadow on image elements

From: Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 3 Aug 2010 16:13:05 -0700
Message-Id: <64156714-17D2-4E5E-AF3F-36FEA1A4B0E5@gmail.com>
Cc: Simon Fraser <smfr@me.com>, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>, Brian Manthos <brianman@microsoft.com>, divya manian <divya.manian@gmail.com>, "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
To: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>
On Aug 3, 2010, at 12:41 PM, "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Tue, Aug 3, 2010 at 11:30 AM, Simon Fraser <smfr@me.com> wrote:
>> On Aug 3, 2010, at 11:22 AM, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
>>> On Tue, Aug 3, 2010 at 10:54 AM, Simon Fraser <smfr@me.com> wrote:
>>>> So one thing I don't understand about this proposed use of
>>>> inset shadow, illustrated at
>>>> <http://dl.dropbox.com/u/952/pola/index.html>, is why the
>>>> background-image is dimmed out at all.
>>>> The inset shadow goes from fully opaque at the edges of the
>>>> "hole", to fully transparent over most of the hole (by some
>>>> distance related to the blur radius from the edge). So,
>>>> outside the influence of the shadow, the background-image
>>>> should be fully revealed. Why is it dimmed out?
>>> Because it's a different image.  The one on the left is pola.jpg, the
>>> one on the right is pola-trans.jpg.
>> I'm asking about the desired effect, not specifically how it's illustrated
>> by <http://dl.dropbox.com/u/952/pola/index.html>.
> Ah, kk.  The desired effect is for it to act like you assume it should
> - it should go fully transparent internally.  Any further effect
> should be achieved by something else, such as providing another image.

Right. Dimming the image is not a normal side effect of inner shadows. 
Received on Tuesday, 3 August 2010 23:14:28 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:38:37 UTC